Skip to main content

tv   Up W Chris Hayes  MSNBC  December 9, 2012 5:00am-7:00am PST

5:00 am
when you lost the thing you can't believe you lost.. when what you just bought, just broke. or when you have a little trouble a long way from home... as an american express cardmember you can expect some help. but what you might not expect, is you can get all this with a prepaid card. spends like cash. feels like membership. good morning from new york. i'm steve in for chris hayes who will appear later in the program interviewing dan savage.
5:01 am
it's about dan's marriage in washington state. they are one of the couples getting married there. after voters extended marriage rights to same-sex couples by popular vote last month. we have david johnston, the author of "fine print." he's a pulitzer prize winning tax writer at new york times and now at the college of law. we have the president and ceo of the center of american progress who served in the obama and clinton administrations, policy director of hillary clinton's campaign. laura flanders, founder of the editor of and the woman who hired me two years ago. thanks, as always for that. >> of course. >> anyway, on friday afternoon, house speaker john boehner attempted to paint a picture of white house negotiations and how to avoid going over the fiscal
5:02 am
curve. i have been saying fiscal slope. now on the show, i'll go with curve. >> this isn't a progress report because there's no progress to report. four days ago, we offered a serious proposal based on testimony from president clinton's former chief of staff. there's been no counter offer from the white house. instead, reports i understand kate the president adopted a deliberate strategy to slow walk the economy to the edge of the fiscal cliff. >> the extremely vague republican proposal did not include an increase in tax rates a position he reiterated on friday making clear there's no movement on the white house's red line on treasury secretary tim geithner as he was asked about it wednesday. >> the administration's position when it comes to raising taxes on the wealthy.
5:03 am
making more than $250,000. if republicans do not agree, is the administration prepared to go over the fiscal cliff? >> absolutely. >> there's no agreement that doesn't involve the rates going up on the top wealthy 2%. >> republicans clinging to what little leverage they have to maximize cuts zeroed in on the debt ceiling hoping for a repeat of the 2011 showdown where house republicans were able to extract $2 trillion in cuts. $1 trillion cut from domestic programs in ten years and $1.2 trillion in cuts through a sequester. wednesday, president obama seemed to set another red line, a business round table who warned against the repeat of last year's debacle. >> i want to send a clear message. we are not going to play the game next year. if congress suggests they are going to tie negotiations to debt ceiling votes and take us
5:04 am
to the brink of default, once again, as part of a budget negotiation, which by the way, we have never done in our history until we did it last year, i will not play that game. because we have to break that habit before it starts. >> so, "the washington post" made a point friday saying you have two tracks here. you have the public posturing, comments like that from obama and boehner. you have inside washington, behind closed doors, he thinks the foundation of a deal may be shaping upright now. what he laid out, ezra is reliable because he's plugged into the administration. he laid out a deal where republicans give in on the tax rates but not the 39.6%. maybe the 37%, about half way in exchange for that. he's saying white house would give in something on
5:05 am
entitlements specially on medicare eligibility, raising it by two years. david, if that's the framework, what is your response? >> this is a total betrayal for the people who voted for obama. it's what a lot of people have been worried about. people who make $100 million a year salary, 80 of them in the country pay the same rate as someone who makes $40,000. there should be more tax rates. secondly, raising the medicare age, it's a terrible thing to do. it doesn't save money, it costs money. for people who don't have office jobs like we do, it's a death sentence for them. this is awful. obama won by 5 million votes. 3 million vote margin for bush in 2008. a margin of one in 2000 where he lost the popular vote and the republicans are saying the man has a mandate. we must give him what he wants. i'm sorry, he has a mandate, do
5:06 am
what it is. people have been calling on the phone and writing saying stand firm or we'll put other people in next time around. >> we were talking about this before. i wonder, is there a way of looking at this where it's part of the political process, part of the negotiating process where this gets leaked, put out there and it may not be the white house's intent? >> i certainly hope so. i think there's reason to think that. i agree with david, people need to make noise about this. mitt romney even ran on raising the eligibility age, let alone president obama. nobody ran on that because it's a, political poison and b a terrible idea for the reasons david stated. there's no other hand on that issue. this is a political negotiation. one day you have tim geithner saying they are prepared to go over the fiscal cliff. the same day, the white house is meeting with latino groups the next day african-american groups
5:07 am
saying why it's terrible to go over the fiscal cliff. you have negotiation on many tracks. >> i like to talk about why raising medicare age is a bad idea. first of all, really, what it is is a shift of cost from the federal government to employers, seniors and states. in fact, because medicare is cheaper for beneficiaries, it's increasing. a president who ran on lowering national health care cost, it was one of the reasons why we have the affordable care act. it's when you increase the costs for everybody, and we'll cut out hundreds of thousands of seniors. the seniors are the hardest to ensure. you are raising costs of the medicare program, shifting costs to employers because they have to shift costs. it's making us less competitive. i don't understand -- >> what they are saying, what the signal the white house and its allies on this front would
5:08 am
be sending out there is they say jonathan wrote this, there's important symbolic value. >> nonsense. >> but, let me -- the point i want to make here is, this is what they say. i wonder how we got into this mess in the first place. >> if we are talking political and efforts to send out messages, this will only create the kind of reaction we need to shoot this idea down. if people get put into this picture, we are talking numbers, politics, power in washington, we need to talk people. i am, right now, paying for a mortgage and the private health insurance of my sister-in-law who worked 20 years in a metal factory in michigan, one of the few remaining. she retired the minute she could. she worked her little fingers to the bone making shelves for walmart. she retired after 20 years. her wages went from $5 an hour
5:09 am
to $10 an hour. she was not able to get medicare. she was 62. she's waited every month to get closer to 65 to get that help. >> lower the age of medicare to 55. make that the bargaining point. >> that's my point. when i was envoking the idea of the symbolic idea, how did it get to the point where the white house feels there's such -- >> they are not proacting. >> there's a term that greg from "the washington post" came up with. the idea is republicans have been making noise for the last few years about the deficit. democrats have mimicked the noise. yes, we have a huge deficit problem. you get in public opinion polls, overwhelming majorities say yes. they look at the polls and respond to it. something similar happened on medicare. we have the notion of there's a medicare crisis.
5:10 am
there's an entitlement. this is a health care crisis. >> i really need to say about jonathans piece. i am liberal, but that is the worst example i have heard. take people out of a popular -- i hope this is not the white house position. take people out of a popular program that works and they love, put them into obama care that is not so popular and they don't necessarily love. take away something they like and give them something liberals think they should like. >> the right question is, the portuguese have an average income lower than ours with universal health care. it costs two-thirds of their economy compared to our economy. we are having the wrong discussion. here is the program. start by lowering medicare is an option to 55 or 40. stop reacting to what -- >> we'll have to continue the
5:11 am
next one because we have a question here. who is arguing to extend all the bush tax cuts is next. wasn't my daughter's black bean soup spectacular? [ man thinking ] oh, this gas. those antacids aren't working. oh no, not that, not here! [ male announcer ] antacids don't relieve gas. gas-x is designed to relieve gas. gas-x. the gas xperts.
5:12 am
wanted to provide better employee benefits while balancing the company's bottom line, their very first word was... [ to the tune of "lullaby and good night" ] ♪ af-lac ♪ aflac [ male announcer ] find out more at... [ duck ] aflac! [ male announcer ] [ yawning sound ] [ male announcer ] when you take a closer look... the best schools in the world... see they all have something very interesting in common. they have teachers... ...with a deeper knowledge of their subjects. as a result, their students achieve at a higher level. let's develop more stars in education. let's invest in our teachers...
5:13 am they can inspire our students. let's solve this.
5:14 am
we have been talking about the latest in the fiscal curve saga. that includes, at this moment, talk of a compromise that may or may not be in the works. an increase in the top marginal tax rate, short of what obama has been asking for, but still an increase and changes to medicare with the eligibility age in exchange for that on the democratic side. we were talking about, from the democratic standpoint, the medicare issue. i want to talk about the rate issue. there can't be a deal, unless republicans, even on these terms can't be a deal unless republicans go along with
5:15 am
increasing the tax rate. there hasn't been a single republican willing to vote to increase tax rates. i want to bring in a former member of mitt romney's health care advisory group. blog on forbes health care. i want to ask you about that piece of it. we have been talking about this potential deal of 37% of the top marginal tax rate. do you see a scenario where republicans would vote for that in congress? >> well, first of all, i have to respond to this interesting hyperbole about medicare death sentence. if you raise the retirement age for medicare, we have the affordable care act as the backstop. everybody is still poverty level. we are talking means testing medicare by raising the retirement age. people who are upper income, above 400% of the poverty level
5:16 am
won't be subsidized. it's where entitlement reform should go, to expand it into the retiree population. >> immaterial to stick to taxing, but i would make the point on medicare, we have obama care in place. one issue is we don't have it in place right now. i think we are going to talk about it later. states have to set up exchanges. they have to expand medicaid eligibility. i want to ask about this tax piece. it's been more than two deck kalds since a single republican in congress said hey, i am willing to vote for a tax increase, even if we had to deal along the per am ters. republicans have to do that. can you see it happening? >> speaker boehner said he's willing to raise revenue. his method is simplify the tax code, eliminating the deductions wealthy people take advantage of. president obama is less interested in that. his emphasis is raising rates.
5:17 am
that's been the debate. republicans may or may not concede on that. as you said, they don't have a lot of leverage. if they do nothing, if no law passes, they go over the fiscal cliff. >> that raises the issue. you are talking what a disaster the medicare eligibility portion of this would be, do you look at the compromise of 37%, if you could get something more favorable on medicare, would you say going up to 37% instead of 39.6 is enough? >> no. look, there was a tax plan and we looked at the discussion of keeping the rates at the level and reforming the tax code and dealing with deductions. the truth is, if you want to have significant deficit reduction, which republicans are arguing for and you want to stabilize the debt, we need significant revenue. we need to -- the real challenge we have is we are not raising revenue. it's at the lowest levels it's been in decades.
5:18 am
the fairest and best way to do that is move from 35 to 39.6%. go back to the clinton levels. we have this level in 2000, from '93 to 2000. we had great growth. we looked at the issue. we have bob on our plan. the reason we have that is because we recognize this argument republicans have made, which is that raising the rates will hurt the economy has not been proven true by the facts. >> to try to put this into perspective here, i want to say, i think the story goes back 30 years. i think there's a key pivot point here. i want to play a clip from 1988. that will kind of be a good basis here. let's play that first. >> congress will push me to raise taxes and i'll say no. they will push and i'll say no. they will push again to them and i'll say, read my lips, no new
5:19 am
taxes. >> okay. efbd remembers george bush senior saying read my lips, no new taxes. two years later, hold over deficits from the reagans. he decided to cut a deal to raise taxes and go after the deficit. there was a revolt in the republican party. it was led by newt gingrich who said no, we are not going to raise rates. from that point forward, republicans have been terrified of being on the wrong side on this issue. in 1993, bill clinton raised the rate up to 39.6. there wasn't a single republican that went along with it. there were threats. republicans in 1993 said we'll have a second recession. we are going to lose 2 million jobs. we had the roaring '90s. i come back to you on this because this is a question i have been looking for an answer
5:20 am
for. how do you reckon with what happened when he raised the taxes and the deficit reduction. >> there's a lot of points to make about that. first of all, we don't have clinton levels of spending. that's the biggest problem. we have obama levels of spending. if we are going to pay for that, some democrats are admitting, taxes have to go up on not just the top 2%, it has to be everybody. during the bush years from 2000 to 2007, the top 1% paid $84 billion more in revenue in 2007 than 20006789 their share of the overall tax burden went up. the bottom half of the country, their share of income tax revenue went down from 3.9 to 2.9%. they paid 6 billion less. economic growth is important. there's a lot of ways to get economic growth. clinton benefited from the dot
5:21 am
com bubble as well. yes, it would be great to have the clinton economy. if we had clinton tax rates and spending levels, republicans would be fine with that. >> there's a lot to get to in that. a lot of people want to jump in and they are going to when we come back. obligations, but obligations. i need to rethink the core of my portfolio. what i really need is sleep. introducing the ishares core, building blocks for the heart of your portfolio. find out why 9 out of 10 large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. risk includes possible loss of principal.
5:22 am
who have used androgel 1%, there's big news. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet,
5:23 am
or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62% so you can use less gel. log on now to and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%. what are you waiting for? this is big news. so, the 5.3-liter v8 silverado can tow up to 9,600 pounds? 315 horsepower. what's that in reindeer-power? [ laughs ] [ pencil scratches ]
5:24 am
[ male announcer ] chevy's giving more. get the best offer of the year -- 0% apr financing for 60 months plus $1,000 holiday bonus cash. plus trade up for an additional $1,000 trade-in allowance. hurry. bonus cash ends january 2nd. i just asked to grapple with the success of the clinton budget in 1993 in terms of bringing down the deficit and the economic growth from the 1990s. i know you were looking to say something. >> the average income of the bottom 90% of americans has fallen to the level of 1966 when johnson was president. the top 1% of the top 1% has gone from 4 million to 22 million. in 2010, the first year of the recovery, 37% of all the increased income in the entire country went to 15,600 households. we have created a privatized
5:25 am
system to redistribute upwards and the reason people at the top are sharing a larger portion of the income taxes because their incomes are growing at an enormous rate, but their burden is falling. to suggest we don't need to raise more revenue by applying it to people, success depends on this government, living in this society with rules that make it possible to make that money is outrageous. it is arguing that we should burden the rich. >> we have having this discussion where president obama's bottom line demand has been raise the top marginal rate. now, we are saying it will be 37 and not 39. when you look at the ageing population, the demands of the next fewer generations and where the tax burden is now, we need a conversation beyond that. >> you are right. we have 50, 50, 5-0 million
5:26 am
americans living in poverty with food stamp help. 9 million americans over the age of 50 who are food insecure. one in three of us have no savings. you talk the johnson years. in that period, '65 to '73 they reduced poverty to 43%. we know how to do it. it works. that is what we should be talking about. we are in a crisis to see stimulus, stimulus of poverty and hunger. going back to '63, more than 60% of americans, even 1983, 60% of americans have private pension plans. now, it's under 70%. the young people with greater unemployment than ever before. this is the stuff that we want to be talking about after the last election. >> children and poverty are exploding. >> also, we need higher tax rates for the tippy top earners because everybody likes to talk about building the middle class
5:27 am
or rebuilding the middle class. the top tax rate that is built them in the '40s,' 50s and '60s. you can't stay at 37. -- >> we are talking so much -- i'm not saying we shouldn't be. it would be impossible to get republicans to sign off on a tax increase. obviously, you need to talk about raising the rates on the wealthy. are there other sorts of taxes that should be in the mix? i'm thinking a carbon tax or wealth tax. >> wall street doesn't want a carbon tax. if you want less of something, tax it. they want cap and trade to play games and not improve the environment. we need a discussion about tax policy but follow the principle, the greater the gain the greater the burden you bare. many conservatives think that. they are running the debate and
5:28 am
totally ahistorical. >> i think this is a really important point about what else favors the wealthy in our tax system. one of the critical issues is the system of deductions. today, the way deductions work, the mortgage deductions or charitable deduction. if you give $10,000, you do $10,000 of a mortgage amount in a year. because of the way rates work as a deduction, it's $3500 if you are in the rate of 35%. and $1500 if you are a middle class family in the 15% marginal rate. it's $10,000. same for two families and much bigger value. it's upsidedown. in a tax plan we put forward, we addressed that issue. we transformed everything into an 18% credit. it's fair across the board. deductions are a way, a big way the tax system favors the well
5:29 am
off and well-to-do. it's one of the reasons people are cynical about taxes. conservatives who argue about making the system fair. the best way is to deal with the deductions in the right way. the only way to do this, there's not -- we looked at this. i just want to be clear. >> i feel like we start talking deductions it becomes we are programmed to say there's a deficit crisis and a medicare crisis. we are programmed to say, you know, let's talk about deductions here, tackle deductions. i think we should. we have to have a more specific conversation about some of the deductions, the state income tax that encouraged stated. the charitable deductions and survival. >> another thing to talk about is if we accept the program that way. this plan was co-authored by larry somers. one of the things in it that we
5:30 am
haven't discussed is the $100 billion cuts in defense spending. itis important to mention. there are tax plans, the tax plan, the proposal to tax transactions on wall street would generate $350 billion, new revenue. this is the sort of conversation we need. >> i want to talk a little bit more about that and more about the idea of another debt ceiling show down which is possible here. we'll talk about that when we come back. maybe you want to incorporate a business. or protect your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like the help of an attorney. at legalzoom a legal plan attorney is available in most states with every personalized document to answer questions. get started at today. and now you're protected.
5:31 am
can i still ship a gift in time for christmas? yeah, sure you can. great. where's your gift? uh... whew. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. ship fedex express by december 22nd for christmas delivery.
5:32 am
you won't just find us online,
5:33 am
you'll also find us in person, with dedicated support teams at over 500 branches nationwide. so when you call or visit, you can ask for a name you know. because personal service starts with a real person. [ rodger ] at scottrade, seven dollar trades are just the start. our support teams are nearby, ready to help. it's no wonder so many investors are saying... [ all ] i'm with scottrade. i want to talk about the dreaded debt ceiling. you want to talk deductions. >> romney supported deductions. there's nothing further than the truth. the cap plan has the 39.6 rate and reform deductions in a way that protects middle class families. the republican position today, and romney's position was to
5:34 am
address them in a way that made middle class families pay a lot more. that's the irony of their position, to protect high income wage earners. they want more taxes on middle class families. more people understand that's what this is about. >> that's absolutely not true. >> it is -- >> romney explicitly promised he would not raise taxes on the middle class. if he needed to, he would be less aggressive on rate deduction. he said that clearly. >> this is feeling very october 2012. let's bring it back to the present tense. the debt ceiling. this was 2011. the republicans are talking about, you know, staging another debt ceiling showdown. i want to play a clip of mitch mcconnell talking about that. let's play it now. >> by demanding the power to raise the debt limit when ever he wants by as much as he wants, he showed what he's after is
5:35 am
assuming unprecedented power to spend taxpayer dollars without anyone -- i assure you it's not going to happen. >> the back story is republicans have no leverage in the fiscal curve talks. if nothing happens, they don't get anything they are looking for january 1st. but, they see a chance to get leverage here a month later when we hit the debt ceiling. they are talking about if we don't get the concessions right now in these negotiations, we are going to hold it over your head. i'm looking at this. in the way out, the constitutional scholars offered, they say there is -- congress can't default like this. we are going to keep on like nothing happened. the white house explicitly ruled that out. it would unsettle the markets. short of that, the republicans have leverage again, don't they? >> sadly, it seems to me they do.
5:36 am
i was happy to hear the president say this should not be part of the bargaining and part of the game. but it became part of the game because he endulged in it in 2011 and thought he could cut a grand bargain. there's been a precedence set. the white house is going to have to be very tough to get around going back. >> how about the reason our federal debt roughly tripled is tax cuts promoted by republicans that caused revenues to fall dramatically. wars that were undeclared and n unpaid for and other policies. i'm an orphan. they should be ridiculed for this as well as punished by voters for threatening the country's economic standing over a political gamesmanship. interest rates are at the lowest in 700 years.
5:37 am
their fear of borrowing is unicorn. >> it's true you can go back and obama is frequently cited by republicans voting against raising the debt ceiling in 2006. democrats were never in the past and even republicans were never trying to stage this show down where it was anything more than a symbolic vote and not using it for leverage. when you hear mitch mcconnell talking like that, is this healthy to use the debt ceiling this way? >> i understand the point that congress has the power of the purse under our system and it's their authority to raise the debt ceiling or not. i'm also of the view you can't have brinkmanship. it's turbulent. we saw this and would see it again. if we were every to default on debt, it would do immense damage to borrowing ability and damage to capital markets and faith in
5:38 am
the stability of markets. i'm not a fan of it. i really advocate a way to do fiscal negotiations doesn't involve debt ceiling brinkmanship. >> just to be clear, what the president is talking about is the idea from last year. >> the idea that mitch mcconnell filibustered on the floor. the democrats said great idea. >> you know, conservatives have been arguing about certainty in the markets and uncertainty. there's no greater uncertainty to markets, to business, to confidence than the idea that the united states could possibly default. so, i think, you know, this is a really opportunity for the business community. it's why the president raised it with the business round table to make the case to republicans that, you know, when you talk about all these catastrophes in europe and things happening in other countries, to make the united states a place where people feel they can do business, we should take out this brinkmanship for their
5:39 am
political games. there was an election on these issues. there was an election on rates. the president was clear on raising the rate and he won. democrats expanded in the senate. it's not like this is a new debate. >> we talk about how the business community was at odds with the campaign. in terms of preventing a debt ceiling showdown, it may be his ally. >> a former health care adviser to the romney campaign, david k. johnston and joan walsh thanks for joining us. >> understanding the tragedy might be impossible. why dry? after this. twins. i didn't see them coming.
5:40 am
5:41 am
5:42 am
i have obligations. cute obligations, but obligations. i need to rethink the core of my portfolio. what i really need is sleep. introducing the ishares core, building blocks for the heart of your portfolio. find out why 9 out of 10 large professional investors choose ishares for their etfs. ishares by blackrock. call 1-800-ishares for a prospectus which includes investment objectives, risks, charges and expenses. read and consider it carefully before investing. risk includes possible loss of principal. sxz final hours sleeping in his car outside the houm of another woman. the kansas city police department released video of him sleeping and whether there's a glimpse of him before he took
5:43 am
the life of the mother of their 3-year-old girl before taking his own. there was no hint of trouble to come. this afternoon, the kansas city chiefs will try to cope with the stew side of their linebacker turning back to football. it's what they did last week after belcher returned home, argued with perkins and his own mother and daughter in the house, shot perkins nine times, called 911. on wednesday, officials released tape of the call where she's heard trying to save perkins life. >> we are on the way. we have been on the way the whole time. >> how hold is the patient. 22. >> a male or female? >> female. >> is she breathing. >> please hurry. they were arguing. >> she's been shot? >> yes. >> okay. right now, is she awake? >> the ambulance is on the way, you hear me? you hear me?
5:44 am
cassandra? stay with me. >> belcher drove to the practice facility and put a gun to his head and pulled the trigger. the chiefs were aware of issues between them and provided couple counseling. no one flagged behavior that needed to be addressed. a week before the shooting, belcher appears carefree reminiscing about what he loved about thanksgiving as a kid. >> smelling the great food. mom and grandma's cooking u. you jump up to go see and they tell you it's not ready yet. >> he mocked perkins and the chiefs. belcher replies, our offense can't even put seven on the board. baby momma crazy, but i have a little girl almost 3 months. she makes me smile on the worst
5:45 am
day. suggested belcher would need a gun to ward off his daughter's future boyfriends. i have guns for her little bfs. between the text messages and the shooting itself, we have no answer why he did what he did. we might not ever get one. right now, i want to bring in mike, sports correspondent for public radio, steven who was shot in the aurora community center this summer, and dave, the author of "columbine." dave, what we are establishing in the intro and what we realized, there's no obvious answer. we can talk about the gun aspect, we can talk about domestic violence. this was an act of domestic violence killing her, but there was no pattern before of domestic violence.
5:46 am
talk nfl head injuries, but we don't have a strong history of concussions here. columbine, everything that came out in the days after that ended up being wrong. do you see parallels here? >> yes, i do. this case is refreshing. there's a lot of recent cases. we sort of allowed ourselves, collectively, the media and the country to be in a we don't know stage. some people have their ideas. it's nice that no single narrative emerged because in the past, particularly columbine with this, within the first week, we hit it soft. the whole country knew why it happened. two outcast loners who gone through the school on a rampage of revenge against the jocks because they were pullied. they were going to pay the jocks back. everybody understand that. most people are sure that's what happened. no singing one of those things
5:47 am
is true. every single one of those is wrong. the problem is, we took bits of true information and constructed a narrative out of it and a motive out of it. if you consider, in this case, i hadn't heard all of those tapes and exchanges which are incredibly emotional, but i was thinking, as we saw little bits of text messages. in the last week or two of his life, he may have said a few thousand words or messages. if you transcribe it all and have pages and pages of what he said and pull up four lines from that randomly and try to -- that's all you saw and try to extrapolate, chances are you are wrong. you know, random bits would be wrong. that's what we go with. when that's all we have, we let ourselves believe that's a reasonable way of going about things. it's not. we come up with things.
5:48 am
>> yet, mike, there are some broader issues raised by what we do know about this. we have the text messages, the references to owning seven or eight guns. there is, a broader issue this raises at gun ownership in the nfl. tony dungy talked ant talking to his team and finding out 75% of them own guns. startled by that. can you talk a little bit about what we know about gun ownership in the nfl, why it's prevalent. >> i will. context is important and conclusions are important. as much as we talk gun ownership, look at the concussion issue. we should not jump to conclusions but there's a higher rate of suicide. as much as we know it can reck the body, it can reck the mind. tony dungy would do that in the beginning telling the guys you
5:49 am
have to register the guns. he was not bringing it up to dissuade them. you have a second amendment right to do that. professional football players, athletes but prevalent under football players. salaries are published. millionaires are walking around in america. how many have that thrust upon them? they don't grow up with wealth. there are lots of instances where players have been subject to robberies, home invasions. there's a huge gab between this feeling of i have to arm myself and what are the appropriate ways to do that. a lot of team security personnel dissuade the player from owning the guns. if they own guns, the only thing to do is the mind set of a football player who knows about violence and knows about the idea of protecting my house or the quarterback. it bleeds into the personal life. there's definitely a huge
5:50 am
culture of gun ownership and also, another thing, you know, there's only four psychiatrists that the league uses or sorry, four team that is have psychologists on staff. the mental health aspect, who is supposed to take care of themselves gets lost in the job the professional athlete is going to go disrupt it. >> there's a whole other question and it came up. i want to get into this about the propriety of discussions like this in the wake of the tragedy. we'll get to that after this. [ male announcer ] this is sheldon, whose long dy setting up the news
5:51 am
starts with arthritis pain and a choice. take tylenol or take aleve, the #1 recommended pain reliever by orthopedic doctors. just two aleve can keep pain away all day.
5:52 am
back to the news.
5:53 am
so we sort of had a national conversation about guns this week in the wake of the belcher tragedy. it was kicked off last sunday night during halftime of the nfl game by bob costas who talked if he had not had access to guns,
5:54 am
it would not have happened. let's play that. >> give me one example of an athlete, i know it's happened in society. give me one example of a professional athlete, by vir which you of his having a gun took a dangerous situation and turned it around? i can't think this of a single one. by virtue of having a gun, an athlete wound up in a tragic situation. >> he felt this was an appropriate week to have a conversation about gun control. this is terribly inappropriate, we should not be talking guns. this is domestic violence. steven, i know based on your experience in aurora and the activism you dove into into the wake of that, you probably have a strong view about when the appropriate time to have these conversations is.
5:55 am
>> yeah. of course. that's the common argument of gun rights advocates. it's always too soon after a tragedy to be speaking about this. frankly, it's too late when these horrible events occur. we have to talk about it immediately. if we can't talk about it at that time, when can we talk about it. i commend bob for speaking out on it. he's doing something most of our politicians are afraid to do or won't do. even our president won't show leadership on this. when you consider the majority of women killed by their partners are killed by guns. to say that guns have no bearing in this conversation is absurd. >> how do you balance that kind of conversation? the sort of nra crowd is saying this is just domestic violence, guns are unrelated. there are statistics out there
5:56 am
saying guns make it more likely that it's going to turn deadly. how should that conversation sort of be balanced, do you think? >> i think you are absolutely right. when these things happen, it's too late. what i think is interesting is that the nras hold on the political conversation is actually breaking a little bit. the nra spent a lot of money in the last cycle. they went up against a lot of candidates, lost across the board. i'm hoping their control of the political conversation, i commend mayor bloomburg. he's investing a lot of money and trying to balance out the nra. he's had a lot of victory. it's an important effort. politics have become constrained and the ability to talk about it is constrained. there's a plug at the nra wheels. the less people fear that, politicians, political leaders, the more we engage in a
5:57 am
conversation. maybe gun control wasn't the issue per se. background check or other issues. a broader conversation, does anyone need eight guns, ten guns, 12 guns, are we dealing with an army? they are cultural. you can change the culture as we have in other cases with drunk-driving and other issues. we have the conversation about whether we should have the conversation. it takes place in the wake of a tragedy. the question is when can we get beyond that and have conversations about guns. we'll get into that after this. but when i was in an accident... i was worried the health care system spoke a language all its own with unitedhealthcare, i got help that fit my life. so i never missed a beat. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.
5:58 am
who have used androgel 1%, there's big news. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair
5:59 am
or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62% so you can use less gel. log on now to and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%. what are you waiting for? this is big news. i tell them dentures are very different to real teeth. they're about 10 times softer and may have surface pores where bacteria can grow and multiply. polident is specifically designed to clean dentures daily.
6:00 am
its unique micro-clean formula kills 99.9% of odor causing bacteria and helps dissolve stains, cleaning in a better way than brushing with toothpaste. that's why i recommend using polident. [ male announcer ] polident. cleaner, fresher, brighter every day. it's not for colds, it's not for pain, it's just for sleep. because sleep is a beautiful thing. ♪ zzzquil, the non-habit forming sleep-aid from the makers of nyquil. hello from new york. i'm steve in for chris hayes who will be here later this hour interviewing a man. right now, we have with us mike from national public radio,
6:01 am
neera, stephen barton, survivor of the aurora, colorado movie theater shooting, now a gun control advocate. we were talking before the break about the idea of the proprietary of talking guns in the wake of a gun tragedy. for the last decade or so, it's where the gun control has been. once in awhile, there's a horrific tragedy. someone says we should have gun control and then a discussion of whether we should have gun control. it wasn't that long ago when gun control was a political debate. featured prominently in national campaigns and statewide campaigns. i want to talk about what it was like back then. the best way to kick it off, there's an extraordinary clip in hind site from 19 years ago to the day. there was a railroad, maybe you remember it all.
6:02 am
the day after that, bill clinton talked to the press. he's president of the united states, i look at this and say i can't imagine barack obama or any politician doing this. >> the gun that was used contained two 15-round clips. this man in a manic state was walking down the subway aisle and one of the reasons we ought to pass the crime bill is senator feinstein's amendment to limit assault weapons would make the 15-round clips illegal. they are not necessary for hunting or sports. i hope that this will give more to the need to act urgently to deal with the unnecessary problems of gun violence in the country. >> so, he's making an explicit call for legislation in response to a gun tragedy.
6:03 am
it's worth pointing out. the only thing that barack obama has done on guns was make it easier to carry them in national parks. that is basically his record on guns for the last four years. david, you look at that, look at clinton and where we are right now. it's been more than a decade since columbine. are you at all optimistic about guns becoming an issue in politics? >> my optimism comes and goes. it had been low but it's starting to work its way up a little bit. that makes me depressed saying 15 rounds. he had 100 rounds? >> yeah. the shooting in aurora, yeah. >> what strikes me about that is coming up with reasonable ideas and reasonable sounding ideas that everyone can sort of agree on and sort of maybe chip away at this thing. i think one of the problems tactically, gun control people get into is after each tragedy
6:04 am
trying to make a big push. okay, because of this, we had aurora. a bunch of people died. it was horrible. nothing can happen that quickly. it's not going to happen in a couple weeks or month. it's just not going to happen. we need a gradual steady build and things like bloomburg's project and these other things working their way up. it's not going to happen because of one tragedy. >> i want to talk about it in a minute. from a media standpoint because the media plays a role in the conversation. from the media standpoint, the media needs national figures out there making this case and part of the debate so they have something to report on. it seems to me that's the biggest thing missing. >> let's talk about the conversation about the conversation. first of all, bob costas got criticism because he's a broadcaster.
6:05 am
an nfl game is a presidential debate. where someone can speak to audiences who don't normally get that point of view. there are a lot of people watching the football games saying what is this guy talking gun control? i never hear this. that's why people push back. it strikes me, we need to talk about it less anecdotely. let's debate if he would have killed someone if he only had a knife. let's talk columbine or aurora. what about the suicide rates? forget each individual shooting. suicide is so much higher because people do it with guns. it strikes me, we blame the power of the nra. there have been a lot of mass movements with powerful opponents. civil rights, prohibition. no one said we can't have this debate, the other side is too powerful. the difference is, in those debates, it was an ongoing discussion. now, when you tell people, let's
6:06 am
talk gun control, the people for gun control, it's even. it strikes a cord in their head. oh, yeah, we should do that. it's an abstract contract. when you say gun control, he thinks of the gun, he can access his emotions more readily. it's more of an emotional issue. it's present and prevalent among the gun owners. >> that's right. i think the passion here is often disproportionate. the noise we hear in the media, the date that sticks out in my mind, the debate to me was 2000. look at the clinton clip and the record of the clinton administration on guns in the 1990s. what happened in 2000, al gore lost the presidency. democrats freaked out because he lost the states clinton carried. kentucky, west virginia, missouri, tennessee, his home state.
6:07 am
how many jokes did he suffer about losing his home state. he walked away saying we don't want to talk guns because we don't want to alienate them anymore. there's john kerry going goose hunting. 2000 was a turning point. was that about right? >> yeah, i agree. i think that, you know, people, these things become folklore. the one thing that is important to remember about this issue is that, you know, we did a -- we did work this summer on polling national right to life, nra members themselves. they buck the nra on these issues. they believe in common sense control and safety and a host of issues. there becomes this concern that there's a group. my point is it's not as powerful as people think it is. it's important to make that point. the nra went into conservative states and went after democratic senators and endorsed their
6:08 am
opponents and the democratic senators still won. live with that example. you can take posture here and you can win. i think that's what's important about bloomberg's effort to destroy that myth. it's -- he's been successful. he just started but hopefully he'll play a bigger role. >> let's talk about that. it's an element that's been missing. a political figure that stood up to make it his issue and decided i'm going to throw money behind this. the money is so important. there hasn't been progun control money for awhile. can you tell us what it is you are doing to try to advance this? >> i mean, i would say our biggest priority right now, you spoke about polling on gun control being evenly divided. when you ask more specifically, not abstractly about gun control, for example, having a background check for every gun sale. 74% of nra gun members support
6:09 am
that measure. that speaks to the point exactly. the leadership of the nra is not in line with membership. so, when, you know, you try to pursue opportunities like that where there is common ground, introducing bills that essentially put that into place. currently, 40% of guns are sold privately in this country. that means under federal law, they don't require background check. it's like having two lines in airport security, one with a metal detector and one without one. so, that i would say is our biggest priority right now, extending the background check system. beyond that, as you mentioned, countering the nra with financial resources. giving cover to politicians who want to speak about this issue. >> that's the other question. bloomburg is out there doing it. can anybody think -- i'm asking because i can't think of names out there. who are the major names out
6:10 am
there? are there major names you are looking to for leadership to join bloomburg and make it more than a one-man band? anybody think of anybody? >> i think the truth is, you need to change the politics of this and then that will build support among political leaders. you just had an example where he went into an election, he defeated the nra member out in california. you know, the democrat beat that. there was two democrats, but the person who is more in favor. we live with those examples, more political leaders. the president did speak more about these issues and the need for common sense steps after aurora. we can look at and we should look at, you know, pushing him on these issues in the second term. >> the nra spent the last four years warning of the second obama term. we are going to see the real obama gun control. a lot of people are saying let's see that guy. he's got four years.
6:11 am
>> stephen barton, thanks so much for being here today. from flocking against gay marriage to voters making it legal in less than a decade. how we god here is after this. wasn't my daughter's black bean soup spectacular? [ man thinking ] oh, this gas. those antacids aren't working. oh no, not that, not here! [ male announcer ] antacids don't relieve gas. gas-x is designed to relieve gas. gas-x. the gas xperts.
6:12 am
red jars are all the same right? wrong! you need three uses of a $15 cream to equal the moisturizing power of one use of regenerist microsculpting cream. seems not all red jars are created equal. olay regenerist.
6:13 am
6:14 am
there are a lot of ways of understanding and sbrerp rhetting this year's presidential race. mine is that 2012 was a mirror image of how we remember 2004, a battled incumbent challenged by a massachusetts politician, a wealthy gaffe prone flip-flopper. set against the backdrop of popular anxiety. the ebb and flow is similar,
6:15 am
too. george w. bush took a big lead in 2004, squandered it with a miserable debate performance to win by a bigger margin than most expected. sort of like barack obama this year. it works on mysterious issues, too. amazing when you think about it. in 2004, it treated like a fringe concept. a massachusetts state supreme court ruling, there wasn't much of a debate. nbc news/wall street journal polling 63 tkt to 3%. bush played up the devotion to traditional marriage. democrats mostly just tried to ignore the whole thing hoping it would go away. you probably remember what it was like when bush won. value voters were the majority. america was a fundamentally conservative country.
6:16 am
anyone who didn't support this would have to deal with it. all of this happened just eight years ago. feels more distant after what played out this year in 2012. the incumbent president endorsed marriage equality. gay marriage started winning at the ballot box. 4 for 4 last month. polls show plurality and outright majority for gay marriage. it's not slowing the transformation of gay marriage. it's been rapid and profound. it's hard to think of a single issue. they have shifted in such a short period of time. one of the people is author dan savage. he's getting married in washington state today. it's the first day it's legal there. he sat down to talk with chris hayes to talk about it. their discussion, after this. [ male announcer ] citi turns 200 this year.
6:17 am
in that time there've been some good days. and some difficult ones. but, through it all, we've persevered, supporting some of the biggest ideas in modern history. so why should our anniversary matter to you? because for 200 years, we've been helping ideas move from ambition to achievement. and the next great idea could be yours. ♪
6:18 am
6:19 am
and the next great idea could be yours. have led to an increase intands clinical depression. drug and alcohol abuse is up. and those dealing with grief don't have access to the professional help they need. when you see these issues, do you want to walk away or step up? with a degree in the field of counseling or psychology from capella university, you'll have the knowledge to make a difference in the lives of others. let's get started at
6:20 am
supreme court announced it will take the first serious look at marriage equality, agreeing to review two lower court ruling that is struck down the federal defense marriage act both of which barred same-sex couple from marrying. the announcement comes days after they certified the results of the voter referendum. hundreds of washington couples rushed on thursday morning to apply for marriage licenses that come with a required three-day waiting period for everyone under state law. as you watch this now, same-sex couples across the state will be slipping on wedding dresses and pinning boutonnieres to their suits. one of those couples will be dan savage, founder of the it gets
6:21 am
better and savage love -- on thursday and when this airs dan will be back in washington just hours from walking down the aisle, through the magic of tv travel, i have dan with me here in new york. dan, thank you so much for being here. congratulations on getting future married. >> thank you. it's my pleasure. >> i have to start with your reaction to the supreme court granting this case. all eyes have been on this. there's a lot of tension and excitement in equal measure among equality activists. >> yeah. i'm going to date myself saying are we going to get it. if we get evans, a '96 report, i remember that day when the decision came down.
6:22 am
i want to reassure people that that decision and how big it was laid the ground work for lawrence. i believe we are going to win this in the end. i hope the end comes next june with the supreme court decision upholding marriage equality, the radical idea that gays and lesbians are able to get laws like everybody else. if we lose and we could lose, we haven't lost. this battle isn't over until we win. it's what we saw in maine. we lost at the ballot box. the marriage law was signed by the governor and overturned by the voters. the marriage fight is over when we say it's over and over when we win. if we lose at the supreme court, there's other cases because we are going to keep living, existing, coming out, marrying and suing until we get justice. >> lawrence is the case that struck down the sodomy law in
6:23 am
texas as unconstitutional. >> and 13 other states. it didn't apply to gay couples alone. it applies to heterosexuals. any sex act that isn't procreatively appropriate. we are all sod mites now. >> so, here we have a bottle of champagne. the reason is i believe, you brought this bottle of champaign. >> i did. this is a sell bra tour bottle. >> the hotel heard i was getting married and they thought i was here for the honeymoon so that was in our room. i'm here alone, so i thought i would bring it and share it with you. >> this is a rare opportunity to consume champaign on set which i generally don't do from 6:00 to 8:00 a.m. you are going to be getting married. you are already married, right? >> we married in canada on our tenth anniversary. we are getting remarried,
6:24 am
renewing our vows. they ask if you are married to anyone else, not if you are married before. we fought hard to get this law passed and we wanted to be part of this day. on our first wedding, we didn't have guests or friends there. we snuck off to canada and eloped and went to our tenth anniversary party wauz telling anyone they were at a wedding reception. we are doing it a bit more, more publicly this time and inviting family. >> you have written about this quite a bit. the thinking about your conception of what marriage is and why it's important to you from a personal level, not here. >> cheers, by the way and to all the other couples. >> to all those in washington state who are marrying, congratulations. personally and politically,
6:25 am
what was the thinking process about wanting to do it? >> well, years ago, when we first started contemplating marriage. i came out in 1981, which was a difficult time coming out, a teenager, a catholic and the reagan administration. it was hard. telling your parents you are gay, your catholic parents you are gay meant you will never marry, never have children and never be a marine. i married we have a child we adopted at birth today. he's almost 15. now we can be marines, not that we want to, to relief of the u.s. and united states marine corps. for a lot of gays and lesbians at my age and older, marriage was the trap that you could fall into before you came out. if you didn't come out by the time you were 18 or 20, you would get married and you could never come out without, you know -- for a lot of older gays
6:26 am
and lesbians, myself, included, marriage wasn't thought about. then you had to think about it. i know straight people who have reservations and think about what it means. so, we didn't rush in. we debated. terry said to my mother, which was a mistake, when she was saying we should get married, he didn't want to act like straight people. >> she you can't act more straight than that. >> we adopted. we were bringing a kid up together. we eventually came around to, i think, not just gays and lesbians to the importance of marriage. one of the most important rights, it's hugely important a lot of lez beyans and gays. when you marry, you declare your next of kin. you get to choose. empowering to say this person is my next of kin, not my parents,
6:27 am
siblings or distant cousins who may be alive. this person that i have chosen makes medical decisions for me, is the first person the doctors turn to in a crisis, is my most immediate family member. to have that right as a gay person is important. >> i want to talk about the remarkable shift in opinion that's brought us to this. why it's happened and where we go from here. had a massive hear. bayer aspirin was the first thing the emts gave me. now, i'm on a bayer aspirin regimen. [ male announcer ] be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. [ woman ] learn from my story.
6:28 am
[ man thinking ] oh, this gas. those antacids aren't working. oh no, not that, not here! [ male announcer ] antacids don't relieve gas. gas-x is designed to relieve gas. gas-x. the gas xperts.
6:29 am
impact wool exports from new zealand, textile production in spain,
6:30 am
and the use of medical technology in the u.s.? at t. rowe price, we understand the connections of a complex, global economy. it's just one reason over 75% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. my great pleasure to be here with dan savage on what is his wedding day, even though it's not as we are speaking his wedding day. i think, as someone who thinks a lot about politics and proudly a progressive and member to the left and think about social change, the evolution of american public opinion on marriage equality is this north star, right? every time i get down in the dumps about the possibility of change and every victory that is out of grasp, i think about how incredible. here is polling.
6:31 am
in 1996, 68% opposed marriage equality. 27% supported. by november 2012, 63% supported, 46% opposed. there's not a lot of other things that changed that radically. what is your theory for why that happened? >> it's our advantage as a minority group, our superpower. often for many of us, we were born into straight families. when gay people, lesbian, bisexual come out, they change their families, their communities in ways that other people, members of minority groups don't and can't. it's a longer, harder thing for minority groups. when they come out to their parents, the ak accept tant is conditional. as they become more comfortable with seeing their gay child, see a break up and see the pain and heart ache is the same and when
6:32 am
they see them in a long-term successful relationship and see the commitment is the same. it can transform a family. that family turns around and speaks to extended family members, colleagues, co-workers, friends, neighbors. one gay person coming out has a ripple effect that can turn a poll that quickly. it's our super power. it's our disadvantage. we are born into straight families. not all are accepting. brian brown and his wife have seven children. the more children someone has the likelier they are to have a gay or lesbian child. to be a gay, male child would be a real nightmare and a struggle but that is often what happens and what changes a family. >> what i think is fascinating about this theory of it is from a very early point in the struggle for gay and lesbian rights as a kind of social
6:33 am
movement, explicitly, because it's a long struggle. the political act of coming out was so central for that reason. but there's a level which, i think it's almost to the point where it happened so quickly, you can think it was inevitable. it was also engineered. there was a lot of work that went into this. >> a lot of work and thought. it didn't seem inevitable when they suggested gay people should be inturned or have tattoos on arms or buttocks to stop the spread of aids and hiv. there were dark moments. aids, even, because it outed so many people changed the discussion and changed the dialogue. it outed people as partying gay, chaps of the pride parade. it's human beings who suffered and needed to have the relationships protected in those crisis moments. a lot of mid-20s, 30s couples
6:34 am
went from mid-20, mid-30s, not a lot of responsibility life to end of life decisions and end of life crisis. the whole country was watching and saw that we, you know -- we bled. that brought people around. >> one of the -- you are very closely associated with the it gets better project. it's an awesome under taking. i want to play a clip -- this is the first it gets better video. >> we started it. >> yeah, that's the reason. this is you and teri recording the first it gets better. >> when i first came out to my folks, they restaurant thrilled. my mother said she never wanlt wanted to meet any of my boyfriends or boyfriend. i was never to bring a man to the house that i was dating, ever. my mother recently passed away.
6:35 am
and she told me to let terry know she loved him like a daughter. i didn't think when i came out to my parents in the early 1980s when aids was coming out that i would ever be a dad. that i would ever give my mom or dad another grandchild. there really is a place for us. there's a place for you. one day you will have friends who love and support you. you will find love. you will find a community. life gets better. >> why did you make that video? >> i was heart broken by the suicide of justin aberg. i was sick of feeling like i wish i could have talked to him for five minutes before he killed himself. as a gay person, a gay adult, there are kids out there, not all lgbt are alone. if your parents love and support you and you have a gsa and
6:36 am
friends who have your back, never a better time in history to be a queer student. if you are a queer kid whose family is hostile, which doubles your risk of suicide, you are bullied at school, never a worse time to be a queer kid than now. there are a couple suicides in the news. i wrote about them. i obsessed with the kids who needed a support group but live where there isn't one or parents who never gave them permission to attend one. it occurred to me, i was waiting for permission. in the youtube era, it never required that. i could speak to them. we could deliver it to the kid that didn't have a family or community to bring it to them using youtube. i think when a kid kills himself for being queer, he says i can't picture a future to help the pain i'm in now. there are a lot of happy and successful gay people out there.
6:37 am
we are able to illuminate that path sharing our stories. in some ways, there are two audiences. part of recon figuring our social norms. it's talking to the kids and everyone else. this is all normal. there are people on the other end of your politics who are genuine human beings. i think that gets back to what is so successful. i want to talk about the possibility. what comes after what they call the end of gay culture. once you win, once we win, as you said, what does that look like, right after this. [ female announcer ] stop searching and start repairing. eucerin professional repair moisturizes while actually repairing very dry skin. the end of trial and error has arrived. try a free sample at up high! ok. don't you have any usefull apps on that thing? who do you think i am, quicken loans? ♪ at quicken loans, our amazingly useful mortgage calculator app
6:38 am
allows you to quickly calculate your mortgage payment based on today's incredibly low interest rates... right from your iphone or android smartphone. one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. ♪ i am the ghost of cookies past. residue. so gross. well you didn't use new pam, so it looks like you're "stuck" with me. [ female announcer ] bargain brand cooking spray leaves annoying residue. that's why there's new pam.
6:39 am
6:40 am
i want to talk about, you know, we just talked about public opinion about marriage equality. i think it's the tip of the iceberg about gay, lesbian, transgender. what i think is interesting is
6:41 am
thinking about, you know, gay culture as a subculture. people have written about this. itis born of oppression and in the shadows. it produces a tense subculture. there's something about, i have been reading strange love forever. >> savage love. >> savage love. gay culture as an institution existed in an incredible way as a critique that is difficult and oppressive about het tro sexual culture, expectations of what relationships look like. i wonder if there's a degree where the marriage equality fight is successful. i don't want to get the misimpression. if everyone is now in the same tent, does it mean we have lost this kind of crucial, critical voice? >> there's a wonderful cross
6:42 am
pollination. people are living the gay lifestyle. it's tricking, which is what they used to call it. a friends with benefits is a buddy. it's what gay people used to call it. in your late teens, 20s and 30s, then settling down. >> you are making christian right heads spin right now. this is their fear. >> gay people are reinventing what sex means. straight people adopted what are markers of gay culture for themselves. it's made straight life better. when you see gay people returning the compliment by adopting things we did. why are they delaying marriage more and more? they want to have fun like straight people did in their early 20s. why are they settling down and marrying? because you reach a stage of
6:43 am
life where you are done with the party and the fun. you want more stability and more commitment and you go for that. i don't think we are going to see the end of gay culture. we are seeing it transform. i think we are seeing the emergence of a subculture, gay and straight, biand lesbian and trance gender and queer. they have more in common with a gay person that is dedicated to the lifestyle who is gay than that person has in common with neil patrick harris or someone else. like me. >> one of the things that is great about savage love is the way in which it's so explicitly says people have sex, they think about sex and worry about sex and shed tears over sex and obsess over sex. let's not pretend it's not the case, which is basically, most
6:44 am
of public life takes place with us pretending it's not the case except when there's fractures in that. i wonder, like, the image of the married, settled down gay couple is engineered from a public opinion standpoint to be safe, right? >> it is and isn't safe. you know, one of the arguments is gay male couples are less likely to be monogamous. if you are straight and married and not monogamous -- straight couples write their own ticket. they can't craft an argument to justify it. it's not because we want to redefine it. it's because they redefine it when there's no argument that can be made. it is the legal, romantic,
6:45 am
hopefully sexual union of two individuals, period, the end. they get to write their own ticket and vows. they can, you know, assume in their relationship and marriage, all the things they expect a marriage to be. they can be very different. marriage is very subjective and interesting and new. redefined by straight people. >> do you think that our political culture and social life and media have -- in the same way we have moved toward enlightment, it strikes me when we have moments like petraeus, that there seems no movement in certain ways about the way we think about sex in public life, particularly in those moments when you have sex scandals. >> i wish we would get more french more fast. the appalling thing is the fbi without warrants digging through e-mails.
6:46 am
>> let me stop you there. there is a sense that if you were in a monogamous relationship and there's an understanding, it's a bad thing to do. >> it is a bad thing to do, but a common thing. if the fbi can kick in your front door if you do that, a lot of people should be nervous. 40% of women and 60% of men have cheated. we talk, monogamy, we are -- we do parabond. we are not sexually monogamous. we are monkeys in shoes. the pressures of monogamy over 30, 40, 50, 60 years, the life of a marriage is unsustainable. a lot of people are unsuccessful at that. we should have not like it's an okay, free to cheat, do whatever you want, you can violate somebody, we shouldn't get a get out after jail free card, but we should have a more subtle and
6:47 am
fresh understanding that's hard to sustain over life. some things are more important than sex in a marriage. maybe sex happens once or twice outside of the marriage later in life or over its life. we should turn a blind eye to that. to honor the more important thing, the commitment of marriage. >> having lived in washington, d.c., people cheating. i can tell you in the press core, it's condemning the same public figures. itis hard for me to take. dan savage, author of savage love and founder of it gets better project. what an awesome time. come back anytime you are in new york. >> i'm going to marry you when this interview is airing. >> i want to thank steve for filling in with me for the day. he's got what you should know for the week ahead of this. [ male announcer ] it made a big splash with the employees. [ duck yelling ] [ male announcer ] find out more at... [ duck ] aflac! [ male announcer ] ♪ ha ha!
6:48 am
6:49 am
[ man thinking ] oh, this gas. those antacids aren't working. oh no, not that, not here! [ male announcer ] antacids don't relieve gas. gas-x is designed to relieve gas. gas-x. the gas xperts.
6:50 am
♪ what should you know for the week coming up?
6:51 am
you should know that there is much we will never know about the deaths of javon belcher and kassandra perkins. you should know what we don't know shouldn't keep us from trying to understand the major factors that can contribute to tragedies like this. a study published in a scientific journal brain this week finds that concussions are not the only things that lead to the degenerative brain disease known as cte. the examinations of brains from dead players and boxers found that various stages -- but also in amateur football players. in other words, concussions wrn the problem, football was. you should know that friday issed the deadline for states will set up exchanges for people to buy health insurance or let the federal government do it for them. exchanges are one of the major components of obama care yet to come online and some republican governors see the decision not as an opportunity to make health
6:52 am
care available to vulnerable constituents but as an opportunity to injure the president politically. when the new senate is seated next month, elizabeth warren will take her place as a member of the banking committee. her commitment to reforming wall street after the credit bubble which gave us the great recession made her private enemy number one for wall street. she poured millions of dollars into the -- you should know that passage of dodd/frank was the start of the battle to reclaim our economy and warren will have enhanced power and visibility to wage that fight. finally, you should know that unnamed u.s. officials told nbc news this week the syrian military unloaded nerve gas into bombs that can be dropped on to the syrian population. the syrian president bashar assad continues to cling to power amid the civil war there. you should also know while syria admitted to gas, officials denied the new report and said they would never be used against
6:53 am
syrians. fear can and has and likely will continue to drive military decisions here and aboard even in the absence of willful fear mongering. want to find out what my guests think we should know for the week coming up. back at the table, nora flanders from grip mike peska from national public radio. near a tan den, the center for american progress. mike in. >> we know that the university of tennessee fired its football coach derek dooley. don't worry about him. he's getting paid $102,000 a month for the next four years. don't worry, his $5 million buyout means he'll still be the highest paid employee of the state until they hire a new coach. the last coach of tennessee was lane kiffin who jumped schools. this would be in the minds of the volunteers. the coach before him was phil fulmer who was being paid $120,000. those payments end this month. he was being paid that since
6:54 am
2008. they had to fire phil fulmer so quickly only because he won a national championship, only because he was a great, great coach. one losing season he was out. i think this issue of paying state employees so much money not to coach is going to be an area where republicans and democrats come together. like they have on funding stayed i can't which has come to realize is not a good use of public funds. the last thing, athletic department of the university of tennessee used to give the academic department a $6 million gift. sorry, we don't have the money this year. we have to pay our coach not to coach. >> we talk about powerball last week. maybe it's coaching football at a major university in the south. that's the real powerball. next? >> i think you should know that center for american progress put out a tax reform proposal this week that had bob ruin in, luminaries from what's considered centrist luminaries
6:55 am
uniting with progressives. more than what the president asked for. in a way that's progressive. as well as reforming deductions asking wealth toy pay their fair share. why that's important. we think this debate has been too constrained and we should have more of a conversation about additional revenues. what's going to help dwef sit reduction. >> laura? >> don savage has my gay pride up. my beloved has the most extraordinary show running in williamsburg. elizabeth streb. it's called forces. if they want to do something, to speak out against austerity and cuts, the national nurses united and anew is holding demonstrations in 20 cities next monday, tomorrow and people can find out more and get active in favor of the transaction tax or the robin hood tax where they live. get involved in this fight now. >> dave? >> you should know that gay soldiers are still hurting,
6:56 am
particularly in their relationships. i've been following two officers in hiding for 12 years now. it's really, really hard to have a boyfriend. when i see michelle obama and dr. biden doing this great work with military families, it's incredible the outreach they're doing and having the importance of the entire family unit. with gay people, even after don't ask don't tell, they're usually excluded from that. there are a thousand different other reasons that make it really hard. but when i did my piece, i am expanding now for a book, in 2000 we called it don't ask, don't tell, don't fall in love. that turned out to be the hard part. they can ask now and tell you about it's hard to fall in love. >> unresolved issues in the post don't ask don't tell military. i want to thank my guests today. laura flanders from grit and dave cullen the author of
6:57 am
columbine. and i want to thank chris hayes for having me in his seat today. you can catch me at 3:00 p.m. eastern on weekdays on the cycle. chris will be back at the desk next weekend on saturday and sunday. up next is melissa harris-perry. it may be the law of the land. republican governors are lining up to do what they can to obstruct the affordable care act. melissa has the former obama administration official. that's melissa harris-perry coming up next. we'll see you next week here on "up." and some difficult ones. but, through it all, we've persevered, supporting some of the biggest ideas in modern history. so why should our anniversary matter to you? because for 200 years, we've been helping ideas move from ambition to achievement. and the next great idea could be yours. ♪
6:58 am
maybe you want to incorporate a business. or protect your family with a will or living trust. and you'd like the help of an attorney. at legalzoom a legal plan attorney is available in most states with every personalized document to answer questions. get started at today. and now you're protected. who have used androgel 1%, there's big news. presenting androgel 1.62%. both are used to treat men with low testosterone. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel. and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne,
6:59 am
possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62% so you can use less gel. log on now to and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%. what are you waiting for? this is big news.
disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 12/9/2012